Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A theory of human nature grounded in species descriptions should explain why certain properties are emphasized over others

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotelian natural teleology, which grounded species-based normative descriptions, was rejected by the scientific revolution and cannot be rehabilitated without independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a defensible teleological framework, any selection of 'emphasized' properties reflects contingent human values rather than objective species facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory that embeds value-laden selections into ostensibly descriptive species accounts commits a category error between normative and biological explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's is-ought gap entails that no set of species descriptions, however general, can by itself justify which properties ought to be normatively emphasized.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Philippa Foot's neo-Aristotelian response in 'Natural Goodness' presupposes that humans share a determinate life-form, a claim contested by evolutionary biology's emphasis on variation and plasticity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Species are not natural kinds and are thus unsuited to figuring in laws of nature
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Species do support descriptions with a significant degree of generality
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some of those general descriptions may be important
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.